Banca de DEFESA: ALINE CRISTINA BENÇÃO

Uma banca de DEFESA de MESTRADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.
STUDENT : ALINE CRISTINA BENÇÃO
DATE: 30/12/2024
TIME: 10:00
LOCAL: : https://teams.microsoft.com/dl/launcher/launcher.html?url=%2F_%23%2Fl%2Fmeetupjoin%2F19%3Ameeting_
TITLE:

URGENT PROTECTION IN CLASS ACTIONS: the exercise of appropriateness 

KEY WORDS:

Civil Procedure. Class Actions. Urgent Protection. Jurisdiction. Appropriateness. Constitutional Law 

PAGES: 130
BIG AREA: Ciências Sociais Aplicadas
AREA: Direito
SUMMARY:

This dissertation analyzes the application of appropriateness, based on Klaus Günther’s theory, in the granting of urgent protection in class actions. The study addresses the historical evolution of Brazilian civil procedure, highlighting the shift from an individualistic paradigm to the constitutional model of procedure, and examines the incorporation of collective redress into the national legal system, underscoring its challenges and specificities. The research emphasizes the importance of urgent protection and jurisdiction in ensuring swift and, consequently, effective judicial relief, especially in collective contexts involving the rights of a significant portion of society. Günther’s theory of appropriateness is employed to explore how judges can procedurally ensure access to justice even in the absence of danger of harm or risk to the useful outcome of the process —traditional requirements under the Code of Civil Procedure for granting urgent protection. The study concludes that considering Günther’s theory, the absence of a likelihood of the right to grant urgent protection in a class action results in the absence of moral and legal validity of the norm governing access to justice. This scenario does not constitute an external collision (i.e., a conflict between two valid norms) between access to justice and due process, with the latter being applicable in this case. On the other hand, considering that the primary objective of the Code of Civil Procedure, collective redress, and jurisdiction is to guarantee access to justice through effective and timely judicial relief, and recognizing the peculiarities distinguishing collective from individual proceedings, it is reasonable for the judge to prioritize the fundamental right of access to justice upon establishing the likelihood of the right. When faced with an external collision between this right and due process — valid norms from moral and legal standpoints — it is coherent for the judge to choose the fundamental right of access to justice as the appropriate norm to govern the case. Thus, the granting of the urgent protection requested in the class action is justified, ensuring the swift and effective delivery of the judicial relief sought by a significant group of individuals. 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Externo à Instituição - MATHEUS CASIMIRO GOMES SERAFIM - UERJ
Externa à Instituição - THAÍS AMOROSO PASCHOAL - UNESP
Presidente - 3064634 - BENEDITO CEREZZO PEREIRA FILHO
Interna - 2729067 - DANIELA MARQUES DE MORAES